MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7120427750

Há uma herança queer entre nós: na sauna com Thomas Waugh

2025· other· pt· W7120427750 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ribamar José de Oliveira Junior

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2025
Typeother
Languagept
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEroticismQueerPhotographyTheme (computing)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Era começo do verão canadense quando desembarquei em Toronto para cursar o período sanduíche, durante o doutorado, na York University (YorkU). Nas duas primeiras semanas, fiquei hospedado na casa do meu supervisor, o diretor de cinema John Greyson, que, antes de viajar, me avisou que deixaria uma chave em um envelope com meu nome na sua caixa de correios na Shaw St. Durante aqueles dias, estive cercado de filmes, livros e nomes de ruas em que possivelmente moraria pelos próximos seis meses, mas o que me chamou atenção naquelas tardes, em que explorava o escritório dele com as cabeças de pinguim1, a primeira edição do seu livro Urinal (1993) e a vista da janela para a CN Tower, foi encontrar todos os livros de Thomas Waugh nas estantes. Trago essa lembrança dos livros porque, poucos meses antes de viajar, meu orientador no doutorado em Comunicação e Cultura da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Denilson Lopes, havia me emprestado o exemplar dele de Hard to imagine: gay male eroticism in photography and film from their beginnings to Stonewall (1996). Comecei a folhear aqueles livros de Thom e decidi escrever um e-mail para ele, falando que estava no Canadá, sendo orientado por Denilson e John, pois naquele momento pensei que poderia ir a Montreal entrevistá-lo.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0260.010
Scholarly communication0.0130.012
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)→French-language works237,207→